If you are new to the forums, you must register a free account before you can post. The forums have a separate registration from the rest of www.chronofhorse.com, so your log in information for one will not automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Yes, phytoestrogens are in soy, nobody's arguing that. In the case of a human patient with even a remote chance of a phytoestrogen interfering with a known medical problem, given the fact that we do not NEED soy, or milk for that matter, it seems pretty reasonable to just tell someone to avoid it.

That is not the same as condemning these chemicals in soy as "dangerous" as a blanket statement.

In humans, the phytoestrogens aren't the only issue. Soy also contains chemicals that actually block absorption of various other vitamins and minerals. For people, there are so many other more desirable sources of protein (most from animals) that there are really very few reasons to eat it. The only soy products that do NOT have these problems are the traditionally-prepared Asian fermented varieties like tempeh, miso, and soy sauce. Most modern, industrially-processed soybeans are prepared with heat and hydrocarbons and when you know what you're eating, you won't.

Yes, phytoestrogens are in soy, nobody's arguing that. In the case of a human patient with even a remote chance of a phytoestrogen interfering with a known medical problem, given the fact that we do not NEED soy, or milk for that matter, it seems pretty reasonable to just tell someone to avoid it.

That is not the same as condemning these chemicals in soy as "dangerous" as a blanket statement.

In humans, the phytoestrogens aren't the only issue. Soy also contains chemicals that actually block absorption of various other vitamins and minerals. For people, there are so many other more desirable sources of protein (most from animals) that there are really very few reasons to eat it. The only soy products that do NOT have these problems are the traditionally-prepared Asian fermented varieties like tempeh, miso, and soy sauce. Most modern, industrially-processed soybeans are prepared with heat and hydrocarbons and when you know what you're eating, you won't.

Interesting! Which vitamins and minerals does the soy chemicals block?

Strictly speaking, there are "anti-nutrients" in almost ALL plant-sourced foods. They serve a purpose for the plant (such as not allowing seeds to be digested by something that eats it) and they are not sinister additives. It doesn't mean they're poison, it just means one enzyme or protein or chemical in a food may interfere with absorption or digestion of another. Which is why we evolved to eat a variety of things.

In humans, the phytoestrogens aren't the only issue. Soy also contains chemicals that actually block absorption of various other vitamins and minerals. For people, there are so many other more desirable sources of protein (most from animals) that there are really very few reasons to eat it. The only soy products that do NOT have these problems are the traditionally-prepared Asian fermented varieties like tempeh, miso, and soy sauce. Most modern, industrially-processed soybeans are prepared with heat and hydrocarbons and when you know what you're eating, you won't.

Which is why I feed my horses tofu burgers made with only certified non-GMO sprouted organic soybeans. Heh.

Weston Price Foundation is the most rabid anti-soy group possible and their definition of "facts" is extremely questionable, about at the same level as their motivations. That's not research, it's a hysterical, one-sided article meant to provoke panic.

Just think of what the WPF has to gain by trashing soy. Then ask yourself if they are being dispassionate and even-handed in their propaganda. Hmmmmmm.

I have no idea what they stand to gain in telling people the truth about soy and how bad it is for them in the highly processed non traditional forms we Americans eat it but I can't imagine they are boogey men out to mislead millions from eating "healthy" highly processed foods. They don't sell alternative products that compete with soy and they are a not for profit unlike those companies pushing this stuff. Maybe they are just committed to telling the truth? What exactly DO they have to gain? Selling a few books...like that is going to come close to the profits of big food corporations selling all this highly processed "healthy" food to sick and fat Americans? And you think I wear the tin foil hat. Hmmmmmm is right.

More articles discussing the estrogen equivalent in soy infant formula. No idea what study found this but I know there are hundreds of studies on soy out there now.

This first article has some links to studies in it and some interesting charts. This information is out there if you look

No if someone wants to eat this stuff, it's your business. Go for it. Just try not to be blind about the negatives also. I found it was like feeding slow poison to my horses and I personally don't eat it much either.

The WPF is an activist group. They represent Big Dairy and Big Beef and if you don't think that intellectual property and manipulation of propaganda isn't big business, you are deluded. Telling Americans what to think and what to believe is the primary mission of groups like this, because Americans who think and believe soy is bad will stop buying it, and that only benefits the cow industry. They will go to great lengths to put their message across, including "inflating" facts or couching things in high-drama, chicken little fashion which appears to be S.O.P. There are many other groups with equally crazy and opposite viewpoints, by the way!

The WPF is an activist group. They represent Big Dairy and Big Beef and if you don't think that intellectual property and manipulation of propaganda isn't big business, you are deluded. Telling Americans what to think and what to believe is the primary mission of groups like this, because Americans who think and believe soy is bad will stop buying it, and that only benefits the cow industry. They will go to great lengths to put their message across, including "inflating" facts or couching things in high-drama, chicken little fashion which appears to be S.O.P. There are many other groups with equally crazy and opposite viewpoints, by the way!

With respect, Doctor, this time you are wrong. Furthermore, you have obviously not read anything on the Weston A. Price Foundation's website if you think they are in bed with Big Ag in ANY way, shape, or form.

They are advocates for returning to a diet of whole, unprocessed, traditional foods--including raw milk, which I myself consume in quantity. They are DEATH on hormonally-enhanced grain-fed beef, antibiotics fed prophylactically to livestock, and all GMO crops. They advocate eating grass-fed, locally-sourced meat humanely raised.

Their mission is to get the word out that the human species is being actively fed into many states of ill-health today for no better reason than the carefully cultivated ignorance of a proper human diet, and this tiny non-profit is up against the multi-million dollar marketing budgets of the likes of Monsanto and General Mills.

They courageously tell the truth--that modern "foods" like soy are things that were never eaten by the human race prior to WWII, and are having unintended consequences. That veganism and other nutritional PC-ness can cause you grave harm. Among the things people don't want to hear is the fact that most people with diabetes and obesity could cure themselves for free and without drugs just by ditching the highly-processed, refined-carbohydrate crap they've been systematically, and knowingly, addicted to by the food companies for sixty years. And--here's a biggie--that saturated fat from animal sources is required for proper function by EVERY cell in the body, especially the brain, and has no PROVEN deleterious effects at all. Vegetable oil (yeah, soy again!) is a WHOLE OTHER STORY! But then, you already know all that.

WPF's mission has nothing whatsoever to do with selling books. The original Nutrition & Physical Degeneration by Weston A. Price himself is a tough slog, though enlightening. Not exactly best-seller propaganda material.

What they ARE about is re-teaching people what their grandmothers used to know without having to be taught, detoxing people from the lies of Big Food and it's deadly handmaiden, Big Pharma.

The whole bottom line is, don't eat ANYTHING your great-grandmother would not have recognized as "food." Which pretty much confines you to the produce, meat & fish sections of the supermarket; I'd imagine that's something you'd recommend to a lot of your patients!

That is a nice and very user-friendly digesta of the WPF agenda. I have read Price's works, actually. Most of them. He was not anti-soy in any way, shape or form. Later minds have taken his work, much like that of Hahnemann and many other crackpots who had a brainchild that they flogged passionately throughout their lives, and twisted it to promote a very definite agenda. Which is not, the way I read it, anything like the wholesome "eat what your dear grandma ate" shtick at all. There is a lot of insidious and subtle misinformation that pollutes the pool of good scientific knowledge from this and other agenda groups. I don't happen to find this one any worse than some of the others: PETA, the "vegan" (Forks Over Knives) movement, the anti-vaccine crowd, and so many others.

An agenda is an agenda. Those who believe in them passionately go to great lengths to defend and promote them. Even to the point of spreading propaganda and falsehood. That's where I have a problem. I have no dog in the soy fight one way or the other--some aspects of its use concern me, while some I feel are massively overblown and poorly understood. But I do have an agenda of my own: the eradication of pseudoscience and high-drama manipulation of the public WRT health information.

saturated fat from animal sources is required for proper function by EVERY cell in the body, especially the brain, and has no PROVEN deleterious effects at all

Ever since removing soy from my mare a few years ago, I no longer have a fire dragon to contend with. As a matter of fact I just saddled up today for the first time since last October. (on a coming 5 year old, green broke mare with less than 40 hours on her.)

Guess what, no problem, except one to get enough mud off her back so I could get a saddle on.

There are a lot of people who are looking for something to blame. THIS is the reason I'm overweight. THIS is the reason my horse is too much for me to ride. THIS is the reason I've been riding intro for 8 years. If I just get rid of starch/soy or get new saddle #50, my problems will be solved. To me, soy seems like the scapegoat du jour. I certainly appreciate people's concern, but for me to come to a conclusion I need to see real data, and so far I haven't seen any. I work in research and for me to publish a study, I can't claim causation without reasonable proof. Saying that we haven't had any tornadoes in my town since I started washing my truck every week isn't going to cut it...
Soy contains a really nice complement of amino acids and I eat a fair bit myself, and feed some to my horses. I DO wish that there was a lot more organic farming to raise the food I eat, and I buy organic where possible, but if I can't buy it organic, I'll probably buy it anyway.

If you removed the soy a few years ago and the mare is now 5, you were expecting miraculous quiet in the temperament department on . . . what, a 3yo?

Guess what? My fractious filly grew up, too. Been ingesting soy off and on probably most of her life. She was full of beans (no pun intended) as a baby and got quieter as she aged!

Hi Doc, I think we went through this before. yes, she is quite but that is only part of the equation. I was able to milk her any day of the week any time of the year at age 2 1/2. I no longer can do that, and a coming 5 year old is not a grown up. She is full of beans still, just not soybeans.

I am always somewhat bemused by reports of lactation from a putative "estrogen" effect of soy. Estrogen is directly inhibitory to lactation. Maybe the phytoestrogens are having an ANTI-estrogen effect. But that would put the kibosh on it being implicated in "mareish" behavior, wouldn't it? One can't have it both ways, I don't think.

Thanks Lady Eboshi for clarifying what Weston Price Foundation is about. I actually know a few of these people and they are not left wing whackos or nutcases. They buy chicken from me (despite the fact my bird eat soy) and make their own chicken stock...that sounds really nutty...maybe that raw milk they are drinking is affecting their brains and they forgot to stop at Walmart for their antibiotic fed and confinement raised chicken instead. Seriously unreal...